The Maddening World of Climate Change

I’m not one to give credence or air time to climate change “deniers” or “alarmists.”  My goal in trying to understand a very complex topic has always been to objectively review the evolving scientific evidence, searching for truth and striving to sift through facts and fiction, science from politics.  Like the other 99.9 percent of the public, I don’t get paid to assess the latest climate studies or arguments, pro or con, although I do so voluntarily to inform my own thinking, rather than letting others do that for me.  I’m an admitted, healthy skeptic, who, while believing humans are likely contributing to climate change, is not predisposed to alarmism.

Steve Goreham, two-time author and policy advisor to the Heartland Institute, has an interesting perspective on the topic over at Watts Up, positing that water cycle, not carbon dioxide, is the largest contributor to climate change.  Goreham does not dispute that humans may be contributing to climate change, but argues that our contributions are miniscule relative to other factors.  I’ve yet to come across a serious critique or debunking of Goreham’s argument, other than this one that takes a less than effective scatological “wipe” at Goreham’s book, The Mad Mad World of Climatism.  So I would welcome a link or citation by anyone who has offered up or read an objective, scientific criticism of Goreham’s scholarship.  I’m confident one exists, but just haven’t found it.  If one exists, abiding by my theme for objectivity, I will post it for all to read.  Here’s the article, which was originally published in the Washington Times.

Climate scientists are obsessed with carbon dioxide. The newly released Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claims that “radiative forcing” from human-emitted CO2 is the leading driver of climate change. Carbon dioxide is blamed for everything from causing more droughts, floods, and hurricanes, to endangering polar bears and acidifying the oceans. But Earth’s climate is dominated by water, not carbon dioxide.

Earth’s water cycle encompasses the salt water of the oceans, the fresh water of rivers and lakes, and frozen icecaps and glaciers. It includes water flows within and between the oceans, atmosphere, and land, in the form of evaporation, precipitation, storms and weather. The water cycle contains enormous energy flows that shape Earth’s climate, temperature trends, and surface features. Water effects are orders of magnitude larger than the feared effects of carbon dioxide.

clip_image002

Sunlight falls directly on the Tropics, where much energy is absorbed, and indirectly on the Polar Regions, where less energy is absorbed. All weather on Earth is driven by a redistribution of heat from the Tropics to the Polar Regions. Evaporation creates massive tropical storm systems, which move heat energy north to cooler latitudes. Upper level winds, along with the storm fronts, cyclones, and ocean currents of Earth’s water cycle, redistribute heat energy from the Tropics to the Polar Regions.

The Pacific Ocean is Earth’s largest surface feature, covering one-third of the globe and large enough to contain all of Earth’s land masses with area remaining. Oceans have 250 times the mass of the atmosphere and can hold over 1,000 times the heat energy. Oceans have a powerful, yet little understood effect on Earth’s climate.

Even the greenhouse effect itself is dominated by water. Between 75 percent and 90 percent of Earth’s greenhouse effect is caused by water vapor and clouds.

Yet, the IPCC and today’s climate modelers propose that the “flea” wags “the dog.” The flea, of course, is carbon dioxide, and the dog, is the water cycle. The theory of man-made warming assumes a positive feedback from water vapor, forced by human emissions of greenhouse gases.

The argument is that, since warmer air can hold more moisture, atmospheric water vapor will increase as Earth warms. Since water vapor is a greenhouse gas, additional water vapor is presumed to add additional warming to that caused by CO2. In effect, the theory assumes that the carbon cycle is controlling the more powerful water cycle.

But for the last 15 years, Earth’s surface temperatures have failed to rise, despite rising atmospheric carbon dioxide. All climate models predicted a rapid rise in global temperatures, in conflict with actual measured data. Today’s models are often unable to predict weather conditions for a single season, let alone long-term climate trends.

An example is Atlantic hurricane prediction. In May, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) issued its 2013 hurricane forecast, calling for an “active or extremely active” hurricane season. At that time, NOAA predicted 7 to 11 Atlantic hurricanes (storms with sustained wind speeds of 74 mph or higher). In August NOAA revised their forecast down to 6 to 9 hurricanes. We entered October with a count of only two hurricane-strength storms. Computer models are unable to accurately forecast one season of Earth’s water cycle in just one region.

clip_image004

The IPCC and proponents of the theory of man-made warming are stumped by the 15-year halt in global surface temperature rise. Dr. Kevin Trenberth hypothesizes that the heat energy from greenhouse gas forcing has gone into the deep oceans. If so, score one for the power of the oceans on climate change.

Others have noted the prevalence of La Niña conditions in the Pacific Ocean since 1998. During 1975-1998, when global temperatures were rising, the Pacific experienced more frequent warm El Niño events than the cooler La Niñas. But the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), a powerful temperature cycle in the North Pacific Ocean, moved into a cool phase about ten years ago. With the PDO in a cool phase, we now see more La Niña conditions. Maybe more La Niñas are the reason for the recent flat global temperatures. But if so, isn’t this evidence that ocean and water cycle effects are stronger than the effects of CO2?

Geologic evidence from past ice ages shows that atmospheric carbon dioxide increases follow, rather than precede, global temperature increases. As the oceans warm, they release CO2 into the atmosphere. Climate change is dominated by changes in the water cycle, driven by solar and gravitational forces, and carbon dioxide appears to play only a minor role.

Steve Goreham is Executive Director of the Climate Science Coalition of America and author of the new book The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism: Mankind and Climate Change Mania.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “The Maddening World of Climate Change

  1. Some very interesting analyses in here….thanks for sharing this. I’m going to give that book a read!! The hype and the facts are seemingly at frequent conflicts, and it’s so hard to separate them!!

    • Mike, it is indeed. Although many are convinced they have the answer, the more I study the issue, the fewer conclusive answers I have. I am beginning to reach a point of conscious abeyance. Was talking to a good friend the other day, who is a smart scientist, and his response was that regardless of what is causing climate change, the policy goal should be that of resiliency.

      • Found the kindle edition on Amazon, so I’ll let you know what I think. Thanks again for posting this!!

  2. Hi Brent!
    Thanks for this post & your thoughts on it. I love to pick some about people’s observations & why they don’t check everywhere as opposed to just 1 area. I am a person who believes thinking is
    better outside the box. The only thing to pick about those scientists & others who try & predict things need to take a better look all day & night long to know where & what devastation can happen. In Colorado, we don’t have hardly as much devastation, but have nothing like lots of
    water to worry about. We are more in being in a drought a lot & having to conserve our water everywhere. Winters are nothing like the east & if smog wasn’t around, I would say that we might have a different type of seasons here. It takes longer for this state to get anything because of
    our heat we have here a lot. Thanks for listening & love your information on this post!
    Rodney

    • Thanks for dropping in and leaving a note, Rodney. Whether there is agreement or not on anthropogenic climate change, and how dire the consequences, there should be agreement on the importance of building resiliency into our infrastructure, including water systems. The state of Colorado has done a great job of planning for the future – some great resource managers out your way. Stay safe and hydrated.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s